Re: Five California traffic laws that drivers might be confused about

In my experience, the rules about stopping for pedestrians even in unmarked crosswalks (rarely happens), driving with parking lights, and the right of way rules at 4-way stops (first to arrive should be given right of way) are often misunderstood as well.

http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21950.htm

http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/hdbk/right_of_way.htm

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

Quote
Frank Furter
In my experience, the rules about stopping for pedestrians even in unmarked crosswalks

It doesn't say to stop; it says to yield the right of way. Lately I've been seeing people that think you have to wait until the pedestrian is completely out of the street before proceeding.

Quote
eeek

Quote
Frank Furter
In my experience, the rules about stopping for pedestrians even in unmarked crosswalks

It doesn't say to stop; it says to yield the right of way. Lately I've been seeing people that think you have to wait until the pedestrian is completely out of the street before proceeding.

I recall being told that the pedestrian must be clear of the street before proceeding by a California lawyer many years ago. Don't know if that rule is still the case.
Unfortunately, it is extremely dangerous to stop for pedestrians at unmarked intersections on busy 4 lane boulevards and I sometimes think it is safer not to encourage a pedestrian to cross under those circumstances because it is difficult for cars in adjacent lanes to see the individual trying to cross.

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

As far as California regulations go, I would have to add that I have had trouble getting used to motorcyclists darting in and out of lanes on the freeways between slower moving or stopped vehicles which, apparently, is now legal in the state.

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

Quote
Frank Furter
As far as California regulations go, I would have to add that I have had trouble getting used to motorcyclists darting in and out of lanes on the freeways between slower moving or stopped vehicles which, apparently, is now legal in the state.

Lane splitting has been legal for as long as I can remember. It's just stupid.

Quote
eeek
Lane splitting has been legal for as long as I can remember. It's just stupid.

The story I heard is that since motorcycles at that time were air cooled they must keep moving or they will overheat. Most bikes now, I think, are water cooled.

Parking lights.... has anyone ever used them for the intended purpose, whatever that is? I think the reasoning behind using them at dawn or dusk is so that they won't wear down the battery like the headlights do. Of course that's BS, but someone told them and they can't change.

Quote
Dave
Parking lights.... has anyone ever used them for the intended purpose, whatever that is? I think the reasoning behind using them at dawn or dusk is so that they won't wear down the battery like the headlights do. Of course that's BS, but someone told them and they can't change.

In California you are never legal with just your parking lights on.

Quote
eeek
In California you are never legal with just your parking lights on.

24800. No vehicle shall be driven at any time with the parking lamps lighted except when the lamps are being used as turn signal lamps or when the headlamps are also lighted.

I know that and I know that the headlamps don't wear down the battery. I know some people that will not accept that even if you quote them the law and explain the battery thing. What can you do? But, you know...in my 48 years of driving I don't believe I've ever used my parking lights - parked or driving.

I always thought that too. We have a 2002 Chev. that always has it's parking lights on when the engine is running. Can't turn them off. I see other cars with the same feature. They call them "running lights". Don't understand how a car with running lights is any different than turning them on yourself...

Quote
eeek

Lane splitting has been legal for as long as I can remember. It's just stupid.

Eeek, I bet to disagree. I would much rather take my chances splitting lanes going slightly faster than traffic as opposed to sitting in stop and go traffic and crossing my fingers that the driver talking on his cellphone while changing his GPS route in the car behind me sees me in time to stop.

Quote
oakroscoe

Quote
eeek

Lane splitting has been legal for as long as I can remember. It's just stupid.

Eeek, I bet to disagree. I would much rather take my chances splitting lanes going slightly faster than traffic as opposed to sitting in stop and go traffic and crossing my fingers that the driver talking on his cellphone while changing his GPS route in the car behind me sees me in time to stop.

I've been hit by a lane splitter. And I certainly don't like the freeway being closed while they pick scrape up the pieces of the rider.

Quote
oakroscoe
I would much rather take my chances splitting lanes going slightly faster than traffic as opposed to sitting in stop and go traffic and crossing my fingers that the driver talking on his cellphone while changing his GPS route in the car behind me sees me in time to stop.

Exactly why I never got a motorcycle. I like going fast too much, and the risk of something bad happening to me on a motorcycle while going fast is so much greater than while in a car going fast. The reward was not worth the risk in my opinion. This is also why I sold the splitboard and stopped doing back-country riding after taking enough avalanche courses; the more I learned about avalanches, the more I realized how dangerous they were. The avy teachers would tell us "the more you learn about avalanches, the more likely you are to die in one." The rationale being that those who learn a lot about avalanches are the same ones who spend the most time in avalanche zones. An interesting way to spin the statistics. But for me, again, risk not worth reward; I can ride powder at Homewood any time a storm blows through, with a very high probability of going home that night.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/26/2011 01:51PM by jishaq.

Quote
Frank Furter
I recall being told that the pedestrian must be clear of the street before proceeding by a California lawyer many years ago.

He was wrong.

Quote
eeek

Quote
Frank Furter
I recall being told that the pedestrian must be clear of the street before proceeding by a California lawyer many years ago.

He was wrong.

It's easy to get confused on this one because that is the law in some other states.

Driving near Merced early Saturday AM on my way to Yosemite I saw someone driving with parking lights only. The weather service website recorded fog w/ minimum visibility of 0.06 (1/16) mile. I also encountered someone towing a trailer w/ construction crap which was large enough to obscure any lights on the towing vehicle, and which itself lacked lights.

I think the problem runs deeper than simple misunderstanding.

Edit: I also encountered a gasoline can (didn't hit it in the fog, thankfully) right on the lane marker.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2011 06:12PM by ttilley.

One of my big pet peeves:
CLOWNS who think that it is OK to drive with Fog Lights on ALL THE TIME!

---

Quote
chick-on
One of my big pet peeves:
CLOWNS who think that it is OK to drive with Fog Lights on ALL THE TIME!

They aren't as bad as the clowns that think high beams are for using all the time.

Quote
eeek

Quote
chick-on
One of my big pet peeves:
CLOWNS who think that it is OK to drive with Fog Lights on ALL THE TIME!

They aren't as bad as the clowns that think high beams are for using all the time.

You can't always tell if it's a high beam or not these days. Some peoples highs aren't even as bright as other peoples lows.
Tungsten vs halogen vs xenon

And don't get me started on the blue headlights!!! I keep thinking I see the lights of a cop car down the road, and it turns out to be someone's headlights.

They aren't as bad as the clowns that think high beams are for using all the time.[/quote]



Especially on Tioga Pass...last Sunday evening. Coming around the corner and the drivers finally, if they do, turn off their high beams.



Ohnivy-Drak...a good bumper sticker..."Forget World Peace...Envision Using Your Turn Signals"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2011 09:19AM by hikerchick395.

Quote
chick-on

One of my big pet peeves:
CLOWNS who think that it is OK to drive with Fog Lights on ALL THE TIME!

Bigger pet peeve: the clowns who don't realize they're driving at night with absolutely NO LIGHTS on!

This past month I've encountered four of these moronic drivers. One even pulled-up besides me at a stop light, but he couldn't understand what "Your lights are off" and "Turn on your lights" meant. I even turned off and on my headlights a number of times to see if he could get a clue. He and his passengers were Asian, so I don't know if he understood English well.

---

Quote
plawrence

Quote
chick-on

One of my big pet peeves:
CLOWNS who think that it is OK to drive with Fog Lights on ALL THE TIME!

Bigger pet peeve: the clowns who don't realize they're driving at night with absolutely NO LIGHTS on!

This past month I've encountered four of these moronic drivers. One even pulled-up besides me at a stop light, but he couldn't understand what "Your lights are off" and "Turn on your lights" meant. I even turned off and on my headlights a number of times to see if he could get a clue. He and his passengers were Asian, so I don't know if he understood English well.

---

Driving without headlights is an error that may reflect alcohol or other drug impaired driving.

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

Quote
plawrence
Bigger pet peeve: the clowns who don't realize they're driving at night with absolutely NO LIGHTS on!

Or cops that do that on mountain roads trying to sneak up on kids drinking beer in the pullouts.

Enough drivers don't feel the need to blink/signal anymore.

Quote
Ohnivy-Drak
Enough drivers don't feel the need to blink/signal anymore.

I only blink when needed... I don't want to run out of blinker fluid when I really need it!

---

I downloaded the CA DMV driver booklet and no where did I see it state that, although pedestrians have the right of way in cross walks, you had to wait until a pedestrian fully crossed the intersection before proceeding to drive through that intersection. But that does not mean that you can drive between separate groups of people crossing the intersection, like I have seen people do.

Quote
parklover
I downloaded the CA DMV driver booklet and no where did I see it state that, although pedestrians have the right of way in cross walks, you had to wait until a pedestrian fully crossed the intersection before proceeding to drive through that intersection. But that does not mean that you can drive between separate groups of people crossing the intersection, like I have seen people do.

Yes, many cities are making an issue of this. For instance, don't even try to drive through a crosswalk in Pasadena when a pedestrian is still in it, the cops will be all over you for a hefty ticket.

Quote
oakroscoe
For instance, don't even try to drive through a crosswalk in Pasadena when a pedestrian is still in it, the cops will be all over you for a hefty ticket.

Which you then get dismissed in court.

Quote
eeek

Quote
oakroscoe
For instance, don't even try to drive through a crosswalk in Pasadena when a pedestrian is still in it, the cops will be all over you for a hefty ticket.

Which you then get dismissed in court.

Haha in that county with those judges, you're dreaming if you think you're getting that dismissed.

They are making a huge emphasis about it:
http://sanmarino.patch.com/articles/police-set-up-covert-pedestrian-detail-ticket-drivers

http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/police/special_traffic_enforcement_program/

Quote
oakroscoe

Quote
eeek

Quote
oakroscoe
For instance, don't even try to drive through a crosswalk in Pasadena when a pedestrian is still in it, the cops will be all over you for a hefty ticket.

Which you then get dismissed in court.

Haha in that county with those judges, you're dreaming if you think you're getting that dismissed.

They are making a huge emphasis about it:
http://sanmarino.patch.com/articles/police-set-up-covert-pedestrian-detail-ticket-drivers

http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/police/special_traffic_enforcement_program/

Sounds like somebody needs to take it to the appeals court.

V C Section 21950 Right of Way at Crosswalks

21950. (a) The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.

(b) This section does not relieve a pedestrian from the duty of using due care for his or her safety. No pedestrian may suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard. No pedestrian may unnecessarily stop or delay traffic while in a marked or unmarked crosswalk.

(c) The driver of a vehicle approaching a pedestrian within any marked or unmarked crosswalk shall exercise all due care and shall reduce the speed of the vehicle or take any other action relating to the operation of the vehicle as necessary to safeguard the safety of the pedestrian.

(d) Subdivision (b) does not relieve a driver of a vehicle from the duty of exercising due care for the safety of any pedestrian within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.
Amended Sec. 8, Ch. 833, Stats. 2000. Effective January 1, 2001.

From what I have read here, and in other states, you have to stay stopped until the pedestrian in the crosswalk has cleared your half of the roadway.

Quote
Dave
From what I have read here, and in other states, you have to stay stopped until the pedestrian in the crosswalk has cleared your half of the roadway.

There seems to be some confusion on this, because I've heard that it's not "your half" but rather then entire roadway.
i.e. you have to wait till they cross the entire road.

It seems silly, but I'm not going to try telling that to the officer as he's writing the ticket.

I'd like to have a authoritative answer to this question. . .

Then there's the 3 second rule. When you stop at an intersection to make a turn, you have to be stopped for 3 seconds before proceeding. I've heard of people stopping and being ticketed for not stopping long enough!

Quote
qumqats
There seems to be some confusion on this, because I've heard that it's not "your half" but rather then entire roadway.
i.e. you have to wait till they cross the entire road.

It seems silly, but I'm not going to try telling that to the officer as he's writing the ticket.

I was going to add to my posts; "The cop writing the ticket might have other ideas."

Quote

I'd like to have a authoritative answer to this question. . .

Then there's the 3 second rule. When you stop at an intersection to make a turn, you have to be stopped for 3 seconds before proceeding. I've heard of people stopping and being ticketed for not stopping long enough!

I've not heard that one.

Another confusing rule/law; school zones and lower speeds. The lower 25mph in effect "when children are present"? Does that mean actually there, walking around? Or while school is in session? Or when children COULD be walking around?

As with other confusions; it probably comes down to if the cop has met their quota for the month or not. Yeah, I know they don't have a "quota" but if they don't write enough tickets they get counseled for not working hard enough.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2011 12:57PM by Dave.

Quote
Dave

Quote
qumqats
There seems to be some confusion on this, because I've heard that it's not "your half" but rather then entire roadway.
i.e. you have to wait till they cross the entire road.

It seems silly, but I'm not going to try telling that to the officer as he's writing the ticket.

I was going to add to my posts; "The cop writing the ticket might have other ideas."

Quote

I'd like to have a authoritative answer to this question. . .

Then there's the 3 second rule. When you stop at an intersection to make a turn, you have to be stopped for 3 seconds before proceeding. I've heard of people stopping and being ticketed for not stopping long enough!

I've not heard that one.

Another confusing rule/law; school zones and lower speeds. The lower 25mph in effect "when children are present"? Does that mean actually there, walking around? Or while school is in session? Or when children COULD be walking around?

And what about age? Is a 17 year old a child? What about an 18 year old in high school? Is it OK to travel faster after you check the age of pedestrians?

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

Quote
Dave

Another confusing rule/law; school zones and lower speeds. The lower 25mph in effect "when children are present"? Does that mean actually there, walking around? Or while school is in session? Or when children COULD be walking around

It means that children must actually be present there on the road, sidewalk, or near the side of the road. But if they're behind a fence (i.e. the fence is between the children and the road) then the lower 25 MPH speed limit does not apply.

And for this law, even 12th graders are considered to be children. So if there are high schoolers present, one needs to slow down too.

---

Quote
plawrence
It means that children must actually be present there on the road, sidewalk, or near the side of the road. But if they're behind a fence (i.e. the fence is between the children and the road) then the lower 25 MPH speed limit does not apply.

And for this law, even 12th graders are considered to be children. So if there are high schoolers present, one needs to slow down too.

Ah, I looked it up once and one of the several laws covering this mentioned something about when children COULD be walking to or from school. That can be construed to mean any time the school is in session and about an hour before and after.

The CVC says under Section 22358.4(B) A 25 miles per hour prima facie limit in a residence district, on a highway with a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour or slower, when approaching, at a distance of 500 to 1,000 feet from, a school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway and posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 25 miles per hour, while children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess period.

And, out here in the country, the kids are bussed, or driven, to school. They rarely, if ever, walk to school.

Quote
Dave

And, out here in the country, the kids are bussed, or driven, to school. They rarely, if ever, walk to school.

I've occasionally seen school children out and about in the 25 MPH Speed Limit school zone just east of Groveland on Hwy 120 in the afternoon of school days (otherwise that portion of Hwy 120 has a 35 MPH speed limit).

Quote
Dave
And, out here in the country, the kids are bussed, or driven, to school. They rarely, if ever, walk to school.

Huh... I thought they all drove Llamas

---

Quote
chick-on
Huh... I thought they all drove Llamas

I thought the drover did that.

Quote
Dave

Quote
plawrence
It means that children must actually be present there on the road, sidewalk, or near the side of the road. But if they're behind a fence (i.e. the fence is between the children and the road) then the lower 25 MPH speed limit does not apply.

And for this law, even 12th graders are considered to be children. So if there are high schoolers present, one needs to slow down too.

Ah, I looked it up once and one of the several laws covering this mentioned something about when children COULD be walking to or from school. That can be construed to mean any time the school is in session and about an hour before and after.

The CVC says under Section 22358.4(B) A 25 miles per hour prima facie limit in a residence district, on a highway with a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour or slower, when approaching, at a distance of 500 to 1,000 feet from, a school building or the grounds thereof, contiguous to a highway and posted with a school warning sign that indicates a speed limit of 25 miles per hour, while children are going to or leaving the school, either during school hours or during the noon recess period.

And, out here in the country, the kids are bussed, or driven, to school. They rarely, if ever, walk to school.

North Carolina deals with this problem by posting the efffective hours on the school speed limit signs. The hours will of course vary depending on the particular school so one has to be going slow enough to begin with to read the hours. The slower speed limit applies throughout those posted hours whether kids are present or not (on school days).

Quote
Dave
Another confusing rule/law; school zones and lower speeds. The lower 25mph in effect "when children are present"? Does that mean actually there, walking around? Or while school is in session? Or when children COULD be walking around?

Outside where they have access to the street. Behind a fence doesn't count.

I've been wondering lately, what is it with how much space people are leaving in front of them at stop lights/signs?

When I stop behind someone at a light or sign I leave 2 to 6 feet between cars.
Lately whenever I'm at a light/sign I see people with 10, 20, sometimes even 30 feet in front of them!

Whats up with this???????

Quote
qumqats
I've been wondering lately, what is it with how much space people are leaving in front of them at stop lights/signs?

When I stop behind someone at a light or sign I leave 2 to 6 feet between cars.
Lately whenever I'm at a light/sign I see people with 10, 20, sometimes even 30 feet in front of them!

Whats up with this???????

Chain reactions. If the cars are all bunched up and the last one gets hit; all get damaged. Leave some space and that won't happen. When stopped, you should be able to see the bottom of the rear tires of the car in front of you. Bunching up won't get you through the intersection any faster. Unless you are tailgating, in which case I will slow down anyway, you always wait until the car ahead of you is a reasonable distance away before you start anyway. Another reason is that if the car in front stalls you, and the others, won't be locked in behind it. You'll have room to pull around - as I have had to do at the lights at the twin bridges.

Quote
Dave

Quote
qumqats
I've been wondering lately, what is it with how much space people are leaving in front of them at stop lights/signs?

When I stop behind someone at a light or sign I leave 2 to 6 feet between cars.
Lately whenever I'm at a light/sign I see people with 10, 20, sometimes even 30 feet in front of them!

Whats up with this???????

Chain reactions. If the cars are all bunched up and the last one gets hit; all get damaged. Leave some space and that won't happen. When stopped, you should be able to see the bottom of the rear tires of the car in front of you. Bunching up won't get you through the intersection any faster. Unless you are tailgating, in which case I will slow down anyway, you always wait until the car ahead of you is a reasonable distance away before you start anyway. Another reason is that if the car in front stalls you, and the others, won't be locked in behind it. You'll have room to pull around - as I have had to do at the lights at the twin bridges.

That works on rural roads with not a lot of other cross streets nearby. In more developed areas, this can help cause gridlock where traffic from one traffic light can back up and block the intersections of other streets, especially smaller streets that don't have any traffic signals.

But in rural areas, I do tend to give more space between cars, especially on rural roads with higher (45 MPH+) speed limits. On those roads, if I have to stop behind another vehicle, I give plenty of buffer between the my car and the vehicle ahead just in case the next car is doesn't slow down fast enough. If has helped avoid a rear-ender a couple of times. But in more urban/suburban areas, this really isn't a major problem on most streets. The exception of course is being on a freeway, where again I give plenty of space between my car and the vehicle in front of me.

What really is a annoying is when the first vehicle stops too early in front of a stop light, so that vehicle does NOT trip the signal to turn green. Arrrgh!

---

Quote
plawrence

Quote
Dave
Chain reactions. If the cars are all bunched up and the last one gets hit; all get damaged. Leave some space and that won't happen. When stopped, you should be able to see the bottom of the rear tires of the car in front of you. Bunching up won't get you through the intersection any faster. Unless you are tailgating, in which case I will slow down anyway, you always wait until the car ahead of you is a reasonable distance away before you start anyway. Another reason is that if the car in front stalls you, and the others, won't be locked in behind it. You'll have room to pull around - as I have had to do at the lights at the twin bridges.

That works on rural roads with not a lot of other cross streets nearby. In more developed areas, this can help cause gridlock where traffic from one traffic light can back up and block the intersections of other streets, especially smaller streets that don't have any traffic signals.

That works on every street or road in every situation. When stopped at a traffic light or stop sign, being able to see a foot or two, no more, of pavement between you and the car in front is always a good thing. Bunching up will not get anyone anywhere any faster.

Quote

But in rural areas, I do tend to give more space between cars, especially on rural roads with higher (45 MPH+) speed limits. On those roads, if I have to stop behind another vehicle, I give plenty of buffer between the my car and the vehicle ahead just in case the next car is doesn't slow down fast enough. If has helped avoid a rear-ender a couple of times. But in more urban/suburban areas, this really isn't a major problem on most streets. The exception of course is being on a freeway, where again I give plenty of space between my car and the vehicle in front of me.

I'm talking about the distance between cars while stopped. While moving, I do my best with the 3 second rule. If someone is tailgating me I slow down way before the signal to guide them in slowly. Then I take off even slower. So, if anyone is tailgating me they had better be prepared to go slower or pass me.

Quote

What really is a annoying is when the first vehicle stops too early in front of a stop light, so that vehicle does NOT trip the signal to turn green. Arrrgh!

I've not experienced that.

---

[/quote]

Quote
Dave

...From what I have read here, and in other states, you have to stay stopped until the pedestrian in the crosswalk has cleared your half of the roadway.

To add to the complexity of the issue, there are states that specifically comment about right turns when pedestrians are in the intersection (not mentioned in CA law so far as I can tell) and California law mentions in an adjacent statue that a following vehicle cannot pass in the same direction a vehicle stopped for a pedestrian, so I suppose as long as any vehicle is stopped for a pedestrian, all traffic in that direction needs to stop regardless of the location of the pedestrian in the intersection.

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

Dave, I am curious about where are you finding these "sections" that you have been quoting. The CA Drivers Handbook is not in that sort of format. My son will be taking his driving test in a few months and I want to make sure that there is not some other source for regulations.

Qumqats, I looked at the handbook to see if there is a three second rule and there is no mention of how long you have to stop at intersections.Which brings me to a story: quite a few years ago, I was stopped by an officer who said that I coasted through a stop stop sign because I did not stop for at least 20 seconds. My comment was "what? I came to a full stop." He said that he already started writing the ticket so he could not give me a warning. When I got home, I called the front desk Sargent of the station he was from and asked if there was a 20 second rule and his comment was " You have to be kidding, you only have to come to a complete stop and in LA if you stopped that long someone would probably get out of their car and shoot you." Too bad I was at a point on a project at work that I could not go and fight it. A few weeks later, I found out that the officer started getting so many complaints about the tickets he was giving that he was transferred to another location. I wonder where these policemen get their information?

Quote
parklover
. . . snip
Qumqats, I looked at the handbook to see if there is a three second rule and there is no mention of how long you have to stop at intersections. . . snip . . .

I think the issue is that not only do you have to come to a complete stop, you also have to determine that it is safe to proceed through the intersection. This means you have to stop, and then look around. Some cities have taken this to mean you have to stop for some minimum period of time, otherwise you're driving recklessly.

The rule is generally "come to a complete stop and proceed when safe."

"But officer, I came to a complete stop!"
"Yes, but you only stopped for 0.01 seconds. Clearly you're endangering the public. You didn't look to see if it is safe to drive through the intersection!"

Quote
parklover
Dave, I am curious about where are you finding these "sections" that you have been quoting. The CA Drivers Handbook is not in that sort of format. My son will be taking his driving test in a few months and I want to make sure that there is not some other source for regulations.

I get them from the California Vehicle Code. Just Google; "calif vehicle code crosswalk" and it pops up in one of the first few results.

There is no 3 second rule in California, but, the cop can give you a ticket for unsafe vehicle operation if they don't like the way you turned.

Quote
Dave
cop can give you a ticket for unsafe vehicle operation

Any time he pleases.

Quote
parklover
... I am curious about where are you finding these "sections" that you have been quoting. The CA Drivers Handbook is not in that sort of format. My son will be taking his driving test in a few months and I want to make sure that there is not some other source for regulations. .....

Table of contents:
http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/vc/vc.htm

Vehicle Code General Provisions
http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/vc/vctoc.htm

Rules of the Road are under Division 11 and Right of Way at Chapter 5 around statute number 21950

Check out violations under appendix B for Rules of the Road:
http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/lov/lovd11.htm

---

The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan

Quote
parklover
Dave, I am curious about where are you finding these "sections" that you have been quoting. The CA Drivers Handbook is not in that sort of format. My son will be taking his driving test in a few months and I want to make sure that there is not some other source for regulations.

All he needs to know for the test is in the handbook. Actual law can be found here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=veh&codebody=&hits=20

That's for all the info everyone.

Qumqats - you are so right, I am sure this was he was thinking. LOL

What got my goat is that this particular stop sign is just at the end of a blind curve so unless he was tail gateing me, he would not have seen how long I was stopped. Plus, while I was stopped at the sign, I bent over to straighten out my floor mat so I was probably stopped more than 20 seconds. I guess that I am lucky that he did not give me a ticket for having my head down.